David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In chapter 3, we reflected on the view that the fallacies on the traditional list are inherently dialectical. The answer proposed there was that, with the possible exception of, e.g., begging the question and many questions, they are not. The aim of the present chapter is to cancel theispossibility by showing that begging the question and many questions are not in fact dialectical fallacies. The reason for this is not that question-begging and many questions aren’t (at least dominantly) dialectical practices. The reason is that, dialectical or not, they are not fallacies. That begging the question, BQ for short, is a fallacy is an idea which originates with Aristotle. Given logic’s already long history, it should not be surprising that Aristotle’s views of these matters have in some ways been superseded. But the traditional view retains the original connection between conception and instantiation. Whereas BQ in Aristotle’s sense is said to be a fallacy in Aristotle’s sense, so too is BQ in the modern sense said to be a fallacy in the modern (i.e., EAUI) sense. As currently conceived of, BQ and fallacies can be characterized in the following ways.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
David Botting (2012). Fallacies of Accident. Argumentation 26 (2):267-289.
David Botting (2011). Can 'Big' Questions Be Begged? Argumentation 25 (1):23-36.
Gregor Betz (2010). Petitio Principii and Circular Argumentation as Seen From a Theory of Dialectical Structures. Synthese 175 (3):327-349.
Douglas N. Walton (1994). Begging the Question as a Pragmatic Fallacy. Synthese 100 (1):95 - 131.
Louise Cummings (2003). Formal Dialectic in Fallacy Inquiry: An Unintelligible Circumscription of Argumentative Rationality? [REVIEW] Argumentation 17 (2):161-183.
Christopher W. Tindale (2007). Fallacies and Argument Appraisal. Cambridge University Press.
D. A. Truncellito (2004). Running in Circles About Begging the Question. Argumentation 18 (3):325-329.
Polycarp Ikuenobe (2004). On the Theoretical Unification and Nature of Fallacies. Argumentation 18 (2):189-211.
Annamaria Schiaparelli (2003). Aristotle on the Fallacies of Combination and Division in Sophistici Elenchi 4. History and Philosophy of Logic 24 (2):111-129.
Andrea Iacona & Diego Marconi (2005). Petitio Principii: What's Wrong? Facta Philosophica 7 (1):19-34.
Added to index2010-04-13
Total downloads37 ( #47,356 of 1,102,806 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #296,987 of 1,102,806 )
How can I increase my downloads?